Jump to content


CPTDB Wiki Editor
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Toronto, Ont.

Recent Profile Visitors

18,385 profile views
  1. Historically, the plans have been even more variable than that. If you go back into the mid-1980s the TTC was looking at buying anywhere up to about 76 ALRVs to replace what was left of the PCC fleet. The order ended up at 52 units, but even until a year or two before the last one was delivered there were serious discussions with the TTC, UTDC and the Provincial Government to find more funding to buy more of them and replace what was left of the PCCs. Of course, the PCCs that were still in service at that point were stretched so thin and were so far gone that the TTC di
  2. The overhead wire in San Fran for many years was a weird mix of stuff as they transitioned from the PCCs to the Boeing-Vertols. And even before that, it was done in many places in Europe, although frequently with lyres rather than pantographs early on. As for pantograph retrofits, yes, it's absolutely possible. But it also requires a bit of strengthening in the roof across the ribs to stiffen the structure against the additional dead weight and loads. Dan
  3. So long as the bottom contact surface of the contact wire is below the hanger, there is nothing wrong with using the old hangers. An additional span wire or two may be required to prevent twisting, but that is all. There are some really old designs of hanger where the contact wire was held at the same level as the span wires, but there were very few of them left in service even 10 years ago. Dan
  4. The problem is not that "people might not like that". The problem is that the photos may not have been cleared to be released publicly. They may show things that shouldn't be shown to the public. They may have been sent to you by someone who is not supposed to be sending them, and so spreading them around may put them into an awkward - or worse, compromised - position. People have been fired for this kind of thing. Unless you have been given explicit permission to share them, the best thing to do is not to. Dan
  5. That's exactly correct. This report is simply to reiterate that the Commission has fielded an outside organization to ensure that the terms, conditions and penalties listed in the new contract are amongst the strictest enacted in a North American public transit vehicle contract. It's the procedural equivalent of whipping it out in a measuring contest - in public. Dan
  6. I wasn't suggesting that the SRT needs to stop running because Metrolinx wants to put a second track through there. Metrolinx obviously needs the full width of their available corridor. With the SRT corridor only occupying 18 or so feet of width, that makes that existing corridor far too narrow in its current configuration to support a busway. It would require a substantial amount of additional property - entirely located to the west of the corridor - to make it feasible. Dan
  7. And where does Metrolinx put the second track that they are currently building? Oh, keep in mind that the pair of tracks that they are building there will also have a less-than-standard center-to-center measurement because of how constrained the corridor is. It's not a foot or two, but whatever.... Expropriation doesn't happen at the snap of a finger. There's a process that it has to go through. It doesn't happen overnight. Again, sure, if they wanted to they could. I don't think that was ever in doubt. Hell, if they wanted to t
  8. Because over the past 20 years the trend in ridership on weekends has been to rival and sometimes surpasses the weekday levels. Perhaps in spite of the lockdowns, they are seeing the same trends still in place. Dan
  9. A bus lane needs to be 12 to 13 feet wide. Add a second lane for the traffic in the opposite direction and you're dangerously close to 25 feet. And that isn't even accounting for things like shoulders and other things that are required to be added for safety to the corridor. We're not even considering a platform for a station. The corridor south of Lawrence is barely 25 feet wide most of the way as it is today, and widening it isn't in the cards. It's less than that to the north. So where are you going to be able to put this roadway, then? Look, I'm not argu
  10. Anyone with half a brain would realize extremely quickly that no, they can't convert it. The elevated structure can not be used in its current form. The ROW from Ellesmere to Lawrence is far too tight to allow for a roadway. And the ROW south of Lawrence is a bit more roomy, but only just - and it still isn't wide enough. For the amount of money, time and effort required to make it work, it would only be used for 2 or 3 years before a subway would be ready - even in the most pessimistic scenarios. That is not a good use of resources by any measure. Dan
  11. Sure. And those are buses purpose-built for that service. Which means that beyond anything else, you're now requiring a custom set of equipment built for a specific purpose, and with unknown (but likely higher) maintenance requirements. Which is exactly why we are getting rid of the SRT in the first place. Sounds like a solution in search of a problem, no? Dan
  12. If they can't open the doors, then actually having the vehicle operate along the guideway would be a non-starter. Professionals as they might be, a bus driver will simply not be able to keep an 8' 6" wide vehicle running within a 9' clearway without any sort of physical guidance. It's simply not possible. There's a reason why road lanes are 12 to 13 feet wide. Dan
  13. It shouldn't be for maintenance. With the exception of bodywork Wilson is now just about as capable as Greenwood is for heavy servicing when it comes to the TRs, and any major assemblies can be swapped out as needed there and sent off-site. Unless the wheel lathe at Wilson is not working. In which case they would need to go to Greenwood for wheel turning. The T1 going the other way may just be for storage purposes, as there is little "spare space" at Greenwood. Dan
  14. Hmmm. I'm going to chalk that one up to a faulty memory. Dan
  15. Not just plastic, though. The resin used in most fibreglass is also quite UV sensitive. So are most paints. It's not that it was hard - it really wasn't, in the grand scheme of things - but rather that it wasn't as easy or convenient as later or more modern vehicles. Take a PCC for instance. Or a G car, even, as they used the same Mitchell fixtures. Yes, each light bulb and thus the interior of each globe was accessible via one screw. But there were what, 30 globes in each car? That's a tedious job to clean out for just one car. The H cars used two screws
  • Create New...